Phil Deakins

Czari Zenovka wrote: A regular on the old forums, FD Spark (any oldbies remember him?) saw me post that once and created a "Mute the World" outfit for me. It is one of my SL treasures. Yes, I remember him

jwenting wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Alicia Sautereau wrote: Jennifer Boyle wrote: At one time, it was common for there to be over 70,000 people logged onto SL. Don`t forget that 50,000 of those were bots :matte-motes-wink-tongue: No they weren't. a lot of them were, if you were to count the bots that are now logged in but not counted you'd still get those same numbers. Yes, a lot of them were, but nowhere near the ludicrous 50,000 number that I responded to. You'd do extremely well to get those same numbers in total avatars these days, never mind just bots. But I think you're saying that 5/7 of logged-in avatars are bots. So I say again, no they are not. They never have been.

In that case, I can't use it because I use IE. But ty both anyway.

Well, old bug or not, I'm still feeling rather pleased at finally having completed the script so that it does what I was trying to do I was beginning to despair of it. My jaw dropped when I found that changing from the Sit Targets method re-introduced the problem that you and Innula solved for me earlier - avatars not facing the centre when the bed is rotated. I felt almost embarrassed to ask how to fix the same problem again. Btw, how do you include color-hilighted code in your posts? When I copy-paste from a color-highlighted script, it posts in black and white.

Oh my! I've cracked it! I decided to read up on LSL rotation, in the hope of finding something that will help, but not really thinking that I could solve my problem, and definitely not thinking that I could actually understand it in the same way as understanding rotations as vectors. And my expectations lived up to my expectations But I did spot PRIM_POS_LOCAL and thought that my problem might be because, with the non-use of Sit Targets method, I was setting the av's rotation to the global rotation. So I tried it as local, and it works! Who's a happy bunny then? lol I've changed the following parameter from:- PRIM_ROTATION, rot / myRot to PRIM_ROT_LOCAL, rot / myRot and that has solved the problem. I can now rotate the bed to anywhere in the x-y plane, and the avs always face the center when sitting, after first touching the bed. I've no idea about the other planes, but rotating the bed in either of those will never be needed. I really don't think I'm going to get a grasp on rotations, but I need them so infrequently, and even then my use of them is usually well satisfied by only thinking in vectors, that I don't really need to grasp it. And any grasping that I manage now will be forgotten long before I need to understand it again.

You won't believe this... It all works perfectly now - as long as the bed is not rotated at all. But when it's rotated 180 degrees, the avatar face out instead of in to the centre. Any in between rotation faces the avatars accordingly. If you remember, that's what it did earlier, and that problem was fixed by a combination of Innula and Qie. It was also when I was using the Sit Target to place the avs. Now I'm placing the avs with llSetLinkPrimitiveParamsFast() in in the run_time_permissions event handler, and that earlier problemis back. I'm using the same code that worked before and, since it's a rotation problem, I have no idea how to fix it. This is my current code (sorry but I don't know how to post the code with the syntax highlighting that you two get):- run_time_permissions(integer perm) { if (perm & PERMISSION_TRIGGER_ANIMATION) { // Kep this posTouch to disallow others from sitting // in the sampe spot. lastSit = posTouch; vector posObj = llGetPos(); vector posTgt = posTouch - posObj; posTgt.z += 1.1; rotation rot = llRotBetween( <1,0,0>, llVecNorm(<posObj.x - posTouch.x, posObj.y - posTouch.y, 0>) ); rotation myRot = llGetRot(); // Place the av at the touched point and rotate it accordingly llSetLinkPrimitiveParamsFast(curPrims, [ PRIM_POSITION, posTgt / myRot, PRIM_ROTATION, rot / myRot ]); llStopAnimation("sit"); string animation = "sit_ground"; llStartAnimation(animation); } posTouch is picked up in the touch_start handler and it's global.. This is the code that worked when using the Sit Target method:- touch_start(integer num) { vector posTch = llDetectedTouchPos(0); vector posObj = llGetPos(); vector posTgt = posTch - posObj; posTgt.z += 0.7; rotation rot = llRotBetween( <1,0,0>, llVecNorm(<posObj.x - posTch.x, posObj.y - posTch.y, 0>) ); rotation myRot = llGetRot(); llSitTarget(posTgt / myRot, rot / myRot); } I see no difference in them except for the name of the variable, posTouch / posTch. So, because it's about the rotation, I'm clueless again. I can demonstrate it if it would help to understand.

It works, Innula - position and rotation with multiple avatars. Now all I have to do are some tweaks of other parts, and it's ready

I want to give away my virginity. Can I come to the meet?

I don't IM people out of the blue, even when they say to IM them because "they don't bite" , but I like humour in profiles.

Alicia Sautereau wrote: Jennifer Boyle wrote: At one time, it was common for there to be over 70,000 people logged onto SL. Don`t forget that 50,000 of those were bots :matte-motes-wink-tongue: No they weren't.

EnaudRecneps wrote: However....all of that being said....SL is a marvelous and wonderful place for me, the quality of overall experience and the quantity of available sights is staggering....I saw a list as I was logging on day before yesterday and it said that there were currently 48+K people logged on....48,000 people from all over the world...the wide spot in the road where I live has a population of 2,500....the nearest "large" town has a pop of 41,000! Amazing.... sorry to ramble on like this, but then I never have learned that there is a reason to stop yapping :smileylol: It used to be more than double that number.

I spoke too soon, dammit. I could have sworn that I had the changing Sit Target working fine when a second avatar touched and sat, even though the first avatar was on the first (previous) sit target. That was before I got the all-facing-the-centre sorted out. Now it only works for the first avatar. The second avatar can change the sit target ok, but sitting on the bed doesn't cause it to sit on the new sit target. I'll do some testing with a bench (no changing rotations),but I'd welcome ideas and thoughts. ETA: I'm now certain that I never had the second avatar working because it simply doesn't work. I must have misunderstood what I saw along the way. The Sit Target does get changed when the object is touched but the first avatar is still registered as being on the Sit Target, even though the target is now in a different place. So a second av can't sit on the newly positioned target because that property is already in use. I really need a way to unoccupy the Sit Target and leave the av sitting, and I don't think there's a way to do that. Unfortunately, clearing the Sit Target by setting it with a zero offset doesn't clear the fact that there's an av on the sit target, even though there is no longer a Sit Target. I could do with a means of either clearing the Av-On-Sit-Target, or unlinking each avatar after it has sat down but without causing it to stand up. Unfortunately, breaking the link with the av causes it to stand up, so that won't work. Any thoughts and ideas would be very welcome, even if they are that what I'm trying to do can't be done. At least then I'd stop trying to do it ETA (again): I've finally come to the conclusion that what I was trying to do can't be done. I was trying to make it so that no extra prims (for sit targets) were needed to allow multiple avs to select and use sit targets, but I really don't think there's a way of doing it, and the only options are (1|) use extra prims, (2) use nothing and let the avs sit where they can, but that limits them to the edges of the bed's prims, and (3) instead of a sit target, let the avs touch where they want to be and position the av (link) accordingly. That last one might do it.

You could try doing a character test, male or female, and then build your avatar up again by putting your own shape, skin, etc. back on.

Brilliant! That did it, Qie. Between you and Innula, the problem is solved Thank you both very much! I'll try and explain better what I'm doing. The object is a round bed. The bed part is a flat disc and around that is a ring which is higher than the disc. On one side are 3 pillows. Behind the pillows the ring is raised by adding part of a tilted ring. The customer was looking for a bed on which up to 8 or 10 avatars can sit and chat, like sitting round a campfire. So, instead of the idea of a separate prim for each av that may sit, I'm doing it so that, if you want to sit, you touch the bed in the spot where you want to sit, and then right-click > Sit as normal. Touching it changes its Sit Target to the spot you touched, and it must also face the avatar towards the centre or they will all face the same direction, which would be silly. It's facing the centre every time that gave me problems - as many things concerning rotations do. If I do get them right, it's usually because I've stumbled into the solution. For instance, I stumbled into getting the first Sit Target parameter right (offset divided the bed's rotation) but I've no idea why dividing the offset by the bed's rotation works. I don't understand the "gotcha" effect that you mentioned. I used to use the MLP system in my furniture but I wrote my own no-balls system for my beds last year, and I haven't had any oddities with it This bed I'm working on doesn't have any of that because the customer doesn't want those animations - it's just for group chats - and it does seem to work ok with, so far, two avs sitting, but yesterday I did encounter problems with a 3rd av. I'll look at that today.

hehe, Trinity. You are partially correct. In the last few days, I have got into doing some stuff, especially writing systems. I wrote that camera system, and I've made a significant change to the camping chairs, and other bits of things. But what none of it is doing, is changing my decision to allow it all to fade away. It's just that once in a while I fancy doing something, and you were the catalyst that caused it this time

Thank you, Innula. That certainly does what I asked for. I haven't got the whole thing working properly yet.. When object's rotation vector is <0,0,0>, the avatar sits where it touched and faces the centre. But with the object rotated 180 degrees (<0,0,180>), the avatar still sits in the right place but now faces out instead of in - 180 degrees wrong. I think I'll get there but perhaps you can see something obvious. Here's my current code:- vector posTch = llDetectedTouchPos(0);vector posObj = llGetPos();vector posTgt = posTch - posObj;//posTgt.z += 1.0;rotation rot = llRotBetween(<1,0,0>,llVecNorm(<posObj.x - posTch.x, posObj.y - posTch.y, 0>));llSitTarget(posTgt / llGetRot(), rot);

LOL Trinity. I'm not really back to creating. I'm doing it for a customer probably as a one-off that won't be sold in the store

It does sound like it's not listening any more. I love Rolig's llSetAlpha line. When I read your code, my first thought was to use show = !show, but the way that Rolig has used it is so beautiful

I'm making a round object on which I want people to sit for chatting in a group. The way I'm doing it is that each person touches it in the spot where s/he wants to sit, and then sits on the object. I reset the sit target to the location of the touch and that works fine. The item can be rotated and it still works fine, so I've managed the positioning part, taking the rotation of the object into account. What I'm struggling with is rotating the avatar to face the x-y coordinates (centre) of the object. I could struggle for ages and maybe, just maybe, I might stumble into the solution, but if anyone here can help, it will save me a *lot* of trials and errors, crossings of fingers, and gnashings of teeth.

I don't think they'll miss your support Suspiria

Seconded

Czari Zenovka wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: You see, that I don't get. She wanted to sell the houses because she made them, and she wanted to sell them complete with curtains, but she didn't want to pay for what she sold with them, that someone else had made. Well, a small amount once only. That's just being greedy. I get the greed. I just don't get the rationalisation of someone who thinks that way. Me either, Phil. Actually, based on her basic non-housing display, I'm not even sure she truly sold houses and landing in the midst of full-perm freebies from one of her profile picks really raised a red flag to me. Something that I didn't understand is that, to me, building a house is a lot more complicated than my little 1-prim blinds & curtains so I was scratching my head as to why she just couldn't make them herself. It was one of those encounters that makes an interesting/odd story later...lol. That very thought occurred to me when I was writing my previous post but I didn't say it in case your curtains were super-complex and super-brilliant Perhaps she didn't make anything at all, not even the houses that she sold, and was just trying to earn money from other people's work.

You see, that I don't get. She wanted to sell the houses because she made them, and she wanted to sell them complete with curtains, but she didn't want to pay for what she sold with them, that someone else had made. Well, a small amount once only. That's just being greedy. I get the greed. I just don't get the rationalisation of someone who thinks that way.

Trinity Yazimoto wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Yes, clothing is completely different. Selling copy/no-trans clothing makes a lot of sense, and that's what I would have done had I been in that business. I just won't do it with furniture I did fall foul of copy/no-trans once, though. It is very rare for me to buy clothing, but I had various castle character bots in my castle, and I was adding a 'damsel in distress'. I needed a suitable middle ages outfit for her, and I found one, so I bought it. Then I discovered that I should have checked the perms first, because I couldn't give it to her. I don't remember why I IMed the creator about it, but it wasn't out of annoyance, or anything like that. I'd soon logged in with the bot and taken her to the store where she was literally about to buy another copy of the outfit, when the creator IMed me, offering to give one to the the bot, which she did. That was a brilliant experience. Shhhhh, now you know where you have to go for clothes for you alt :smileywink: the creator will even make trans pack for you :smileyhappy: It happened years before that little gem appeared in my understanding

Perrie Juran wrote: For some landscaping things I would prefer copy items but I understand the Merchants quandary. I could buy one plant and propagate it over the entire grid. I agree about some landscape items. I bought a sculpted rock once but I wouldn't have bought it if it wasn't copyable. I wouldn't buy another rock for every rock I wanted for the landscape.